Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 30 JUNE 2014

"Generic Computer Implementation" Not Enough To Save Patents Directed To "Intermediated Settlement"

Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Explore more from Barnes & Thornburg LLP

The U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion that patent claims drawn to an otherwise patent-ineligible abstract idea of mitigating settlement risk are not patentable.

United StatesIntellectual Property
Barnes & Thornburg'S Intellectual Property Law Department
Barnes & Thornburg'S Intellectual Property Law Department
Author LinkedIn connections

The U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion yesterday in Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International et al. (No. 13-298) that patent claims drawn to an otherwise patent-ineligible abstract idea of mitigating settlement risk are not patentable merely because they require "generic computer implementation."

Section 101 of the Patent Act defines the subject matter eligible for patent protection. It provides: "Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title." Courts have long held that Section 101, however, contains an implicit exception for laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas. 

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

UMG v. DistroKid: When AI Becomes A Consumer Protection Issue

Universal Music Group's lawsuit against DistroKid raises a critical question about AI disclosure in consumer markets: when does the use of artificial intelligence become material information that must be disclosed to consumers? The case centers on allegations that DistroKid distributed mass-generated AI music while creating the impression it was created by legitimate human artists, potentially violating existing consumer protection laws even without specific AI disclosure requirements.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC
Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC
Article

PTAB/USPTO Update - October 2026

The USPTO has released new templates and guidance for AIA trial proceedings, announced key appointments including a Chief AI Officer, and published updated procedures for patent applications and subject matter eligibility declarations. Director Squires delivered multiple addresses emphasizing the constitutional importance of intellectual property rights while the agency expanded its community engagement efforts and international collaboration through WIPO's Global IP Assignment Platform pilot program.
United StatesIntellectual Property
WilmerHale
WilmerHale
Article

The Trademark Scam Field Guide: Look-Alike Filing Sites, Fake USPTO Notices, And How To Get Out If You’ve Been Caught

A business decides to file a trademark. Someone on the team searches for a familiar online legal-services brand, clicks the first result, and lands on a site with a similar-sounding name, a polished design, five-star reviews, and a low flat fee. The application gets filed. Months later the business learns the “service” was not who they thought it was, the filing was signed by someone with no authority to sign it, and the USPTO has suspended the application along with hundreds or thousands of others from the same shop.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Harness IP
Harness IP
Article

Is This Real? Navigating AI Impersonation Under New And Existing Laws

Is this AI-generated, or is it real? As generative AI tools have become increasingly capable of creating realistic images, videos, and audio, they have also made it easier to impersonate real people without their consent. In response, states are increasingly adopting laws that impose civil and criminal liability for certain AI-generated content that replicates an individual’s identity, likeness, voice, or other personal attributes.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Wiley Rein
Wiley Rein
Article

OFAC Broadens Cuba Sanctions And Restricts Payments And Travel

The U.S. Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control has implemented sweeping changes to Cuba sanctions, introducing a new regulatory framework that extends restrictions beyond U.S. persons to foreign entities and financial institutions. These measures eliminate key banking authorizations, expand transaction prohibitions to include intermediary payments, and significantly narrow travel permissions, creating new compliance challenges for businesses operating in or through Cuba-related channels.
United StatesGovernment, Public Sector
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Article

IEEPA Tariff Refunds: Critical Developments, Phase III Delays, And Action Steps For Importers

U.S. Customs and Border Protection has begun processing IEEPA tariff refunds through its CAPE system, but Phase III covering finally liquidated entries faces delays and requires court orders. With the Department of Justice appealing the universal refund order and class certification pending, importers with finally liquidated entries may need to file individual lawsuits at the Court of International Trade to preserve their claims before statutory deadlines expire.
United StatesInternational Law
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Article

California Passes AB-1883 Targeting AI Workplace Surveillance Of Employees’ Emotional State And Neural Data

On Aug. 30, AB-1883 received final legislative approval and now heads to California Governor Gavin Newsom for signature or veto. If enacted, AB-1883 would prohibit employers from using workplace surveillance tools that rely on artificial intelligence (AI) to recognize, infer, or predict an employee’s emotional state, or to collect “neural data.”
United StatesEmployment and HR
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Article

New York State Minimum Wage Increase Halted For 2027; Governor Proposes March Hike

New York's minimum wage will hold steady at current rates through early 2027, but Governor Hochul has proposed legislation that would tie future increases to inflation beginning March 1, 2027. Home care workers will see immediate wage increases to $19-$20 per hour starting January 1, 2027, while standard minimum wages remain at $16-$17 depending on location. Employers across the state should prepare now for potential legislative changes that could affect payroll systems and compensation structures.
United StatesEmployment and HR
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Article

Time To Update The Handbook And The Training Deck: Three New California Laws Affecting Employment Policies And Training

California Governor Newsom has signed three bills that will require California employers to revisit their written policies and their training programs. On the policy side, SB 1149 widens who counts as a “family member” for bereavement leave. On the training side, AB 1803 adds an anti-hate speech component to mandatory harassment prevention training starting Jan. 1, 2028.
United StatesEmployment and HR
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Article

Russia Sanctions And Tariffs: What Businesses Need To Know About The Graham Act

President Trump has signed the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, introducing sweeping new tariffs of up to 100% on countries purchasing Russian energy and up to 500% on Russian-origin goods. The legislation also codifies existing executive order sanctions into statute, requiring congressional action to lift restrictions and creating mandatory secondary sanctions on foreign financial institutions transacting with designated Russian banks. Companies face immediate compliance challenge
RussiaInternational Law
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Article

Three New California AI Statutes: What Employers Should Know

For California workplaces, the new laws change the ground rules: one law governs the role automated tools may play in disciplinary and termination decisions, another adds AI-specific content to mass layoff notices, and the third limits AI-enabled employee monitoring. In this update, we explain what each law requires or forbids, how the law will be enforced, and the steps we recommend employers take.
United StatesEmployment and HR
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Barnes & Thornburg LLP